 Okay, I have a question for you, your own. So, you've said that the role of government is to protect people, that that should be the only role of the government, right? Yeah. Okay, so do you believe that there should be governmental limits on what people can own? No. So can people- Oh well, weapons. You know, weapons I think there should be limitations on what people can own when it comes to weapons, yeah. So do you think people should be able to own people? No, absolutely not. Okay, so then can you please explain to me and justify under the capitalist or quasi capitalist system that you'd argue is in America, that you keep saying you want people freedom, freedom, freedom, you're obsessed with freedom, and you even gestured about coercion, that you don't want force and coercion. Can you please explain how mass incarceration in the United States has prospered under capitalism because of the profit motive and the prosperity that private ties to prisons have generated? Well, look, you're not gonna find anybody who's gonna, you're not gonna find me defending mass incarceration in the United States. It's a phenomena of the majority deciding to prosecute a minority. It's a phenomena of a majority deciding that drugs that you should not be allowed to use drugs. I'm not gonna defend that. I'm against that. I'm for drug legalization. And by drug legalization, everybody who's in prison today for drug offenses, nonviolent crimes should be let loose, should be let free. I don't think that's a phenomena of capitalism. I think that's a phenomena of statism. It's the phenomena of the majority dictating to the minority what's good for them or what's bad for them. Now I happen to think drugs are bad for you. Don't do them. But the only mechanism by which I should be able to enforce that is through argument. I should be able to convince you that drugs are bad for you, don't use it. I shouldn't be able to curse you not to use drugs. But that's what the state is trying to do. So the one drugs to me is a microcosm of the entire, you know, status socialist system. It's an attempt to regulate individual human behavior. And I think it's wrong. It's corrupting in every dimension of it. And it's not only that. There are so many other reasons people go to jail that do not have to do with what I consider real crime, coercion, violence, force, that should not be jailable. They should not be crimes. For example, you know, maybe this will be controversial to the people on the right. Crossing the border of the country, right? Exercising your freedom as an individual to move, to travel, should not be a crime that puts you in jail, should not be a crime that separates families, should not be a crime that is, you know, the way we treat it today. So, no, I'm with you on mass incarceration. But I don't think it's a phenomena of capitalism. I mean, let's have free markets and drugs. You know, again, I hate drugs. I'm not preaching use of it. But you know, you have a right to shoot yourself up with anything you want to. You have a right to commit suicide. Why? Because you have a right to your own life. And the right to your own life gives you a right to do with your life as you see fit, as long as you're not imposing, not cost, because you always impose cost, unless you're imposing violence on somebody else. A right is a moral concept applicable only in a social context. On a desert island, the question of rights would not arise, even though the question of morality certainly would. On a desert island, a man would need a moral code, a knowledge of what is right or wrong for him to do as much as he would need it in society. But as to rights, that is a concept which applies strictly to relationships among men. It is a social application of morality. I define a right as false. Right are those conditions of existence which are required by man's nature for his proper survival. Now I want to emphasize that I use words here in the strictest precision. Those who have heard our lectures know what I mean by man's proper survival. That is the survival of men qua men, the survival in that form which his nature as a certain kind of living entity actually requires. And what conditions of existence are necessary for his survival is also a metaphysical question. It rests really on the nature of reality, the nature of this earth and the nature of men who has to survive on earth in a certain kind of manner. Since his survival is not an arbitrary issue, since he cannot properly survive by any random means, since there is only one proper way of survival for him. And here I will remind listeners of the metaphysical base of the objectivist ethics. Since there is only one proper way for him to survive, his right that is that which he may or may not do in relation to other men, that which he may or may not do in society has to be derived by the same standard from the same definitions. What does man's nature require for his proper survival? First of all, that he use his reason. It requires that he make rationality his perception of reality.